The rolling take off into a ski jump continues the decades long "mistake" with that setup: Substandard fuel and weapons load. Any VTOL engine is going to have a lift fan, so range will be compromised out of the gate to make room for said engine. Unless they can get 14,000lbs of gas in it, like the F-35B AND it's just as fuel efficient (doubtful).

On the one hand, it can't be any worse than the Forger - can it? On the other hand, if they had trouble building a land based stealth fighter, something with corrosion/other issues putting to sea is going to make it that much more difficult. It may just beat the hypersonic spaceplane/Mig-41 into the air though. The Mig-31 replacement is going to cost them a ridiculous amount of money. It'll make the SU-57 look cheap. So I think of the two, this VTOL will be first. I didn't say it'd make it to production, just first in the air (or the sea, if the Kustenov continues its abysmal record of launching/recovering fighters)...

I have to agree, huge waste of $ for what? Just to say you have an aircraft carrier??

The ship itself leaves a lot to be desired, but refitting it with old, 4th gen airframes really takes the cake. I saw a model somewhere where navalised PAK FA's adorned her deck. That's an even bigger pipe dream than getting the land based version into service IMO. I wonder what cobra321 has to say about this?

The selection of the Mig-29K is a peculiar one. Russia seems to have learned the Flanker is far more capable than the Fulcrum, except when it comes to.... carrier based aircraft? OK it's smaller, but it also can't carry as much, doesn't go as far, isn't as maneuverable and can't fly as high as the Flanker. Where are they going to send her into combat, Syria again?

Getting aircraft aboard before they run out of fuel is...... sort of fundamental, no? I hope they can get the fundamentals down (for the pilots sake), but I'm not holding my breath. So here's what I'm getting from all this...

1.) Refitting their 1 carrier is going to be expensive as hell2.) The Mig-29K will be a flying target in 2021. 3.) It doesn't really afford them any real power projection (what carrier's do)4.) There isn't going to be a navalised PAK FA5.) Navalised Flankers are out of the game (rare instance where Mig wins, Sukhoi loses)6.) Carrier is further severely limited by a lack of dedicated AWACS, air to air refueling and other specialty aircraft.7.) The Mig-29 has a dismal combat record, unless they plan on fighting Cessna's and ultra-lights

Overall I'd call this one of the worst decisions the Russians have ever made.

lrrpf52 wrote:Look at what happened with it in Syria. Even in a totally-permissive naval environment in the Med, where none of the Western forces are going to attack her, she couldn't even do daytime, calm weather carrier operations with the MiG-29K and Su-33 without losing 2 of those birds within weeks, and that was with divert fields 50 miles away. These are things you do back at home before going on float, not once you get into theater. Embarrassing

The Kuznetsov's sortie rate was dismal too; only 420 sorties in total completed over about 2 months, which is around 7 per day.

A Nimitz class is capable of sustained 120 sorties per day, with a surge capability of 240 per day.

China has a different kind of corruption than Russia. You used to be able to be totally corrupt in China as long as you could deliver the goods in terms of local economic development. If you don't, the central government will dig up your illicit assets and your disgruntled mistresses and screw you right up the back door. In Russia, you can be corrupt and .... Pretty much that's yet. You don't have to deliver anything except toys for those higher up the food chain.

The Chinese are an aggressive real estate development conglomerate that also happens to be a government, the Russians are a mafia that happened to take over a country.

Ironically Xi's centralization if power and crack down on corruption has probably made China's economy less adaptable by constraining local decision making.

On the other hand, the government places a heavy emphasis on developing military technology. The organizations there are full of young people, driven, motivated and well supported. They will get stuff done fast.

China experienced massive laid-off and privatization of its SOE in the 1990s, including its defense industry. Lots of institutions were restructured and relocated, making civilian products to fend for themselves. Funding did not recover until well into the 2000s. That is why those places appear to be full of young people now.